tv [untitled] January 21, 2011 5:30am-6:00am PST
billion just to build a very short distance. most of us would abandon the subway and then take the bus. thank you. chair nolan: thank you. next speaker, please. secretary boomer: howard wong, and he is our last speaker. chair nolan: good afternoon, mr. wong. >> the central subway's state and local funding would go along way in saving and fixing the muni system which is crumbling before our very eyes. the rail, the train derailments that the balboa maintenance facility in station, the central computer system breakdowns, trains that have gone off track, it breaks have failed. we know that from your own reports that the $2 billion of
deferred infrastructure over many years are catching up. infrastructure problems are happening now come in the years in between this and the projected opening of the central subatomic if it is built. when it is built, what do we have? we have a system that does not solve the transit problems of that 1.7-mile stretch. we have in the eir projections about a decrease in service availability, something in the range of 76,000 miles per year carry it -- per year. there has been no consistency in projections of what the central
subway will offer, but looking at the tracks themselves, looking at the physical layout of the system, many, many organizations in the city, i think there are now over 50 organizations, can see that there is no benefit to the right the ship -- to the ridership as a whole. [bell] secretary boomer: joan, and that is the last speaker for whom i have a speaker card at the moment. chair nolan: good afternoon. >> yes, good afternoon. i live in north beach. i am a this -- native san franciscan, and i have been in north beach for many years.
thinking that has gone into this. there is a wonderful farmers market in chinatown. that will never be the same again. during the construction, what do you think is going to happen to all of those small businesses? they will be lost. chair nolan: ok. any other speaker cards? seeing none. would you like to make a motion? the vice chair lee? vice chair lee: we had hundreds of members come to speak on its behalf, and it was like a real grassroots effort in terms of getting support for this project, and we approved this project.
it would be a real shame and a slap in the face to the community. chair nolan: is that a motion to approve? vice chair lee: i move it. chair nolan: ok. director: is this a situation where we can direct this, or is this a situation where this money is really locked in for this use or not to use at all? >> the millions of dollars that i quoted earlier, that is federal funding specifically for new projects. that is state and local funding.
the vast majority, the lion's share of the funding, federal dollars. chair nolan: members of the board? >> i have the same concerns. it is difficult to look at it this way. it contributes a lot to the jobs and the economy. i do want to at some point address the concern, the elderly chinatown residents who do not use the subway, i want to make sure that we have an option for them that still continues to work, and i know there is a lot that we can do to speed it up through the union square area and threw the chinatown area. i do not want you to abandon
those seniors, to force them to taking the subway -- and through the chinatown area. something we can do to make that bus move faster, so this is a tough one, but this is in addition to the subway and make it across market street. we would miss our time line in terms of submitting the application. thereby throwing the project generally off about one year. it would also raise a whole lot of issues from the federal level, in terms of community
support for the project, and i do not know what the ultimate ramifications are, but there would be some serious ramifications by postponing. chair nolan: director? director: going back to vice chair lee's comments, we did hear from the community. i think going back to look at the records that i have received, there is sufficient documentation for the subway, and ado concur with director brinkman that we have an alternative, but i think we should move forward with the initiative, seeing that we have heard most of the community support. chair nolan: think you, director bridges -- thank you.
it seems to me that this is a worthwhile project. in addition, we have heard from hundreds from the community on this. we have a motion and a second. director: the transportation authority is anticipated to approve on february 22, and will be reaffirming their commitment to the $88 million in state transportation improvement funds, so i want to make sure that you are aware of that. -- has the support of the transportation authority. -- this plan has the support of the transportation authority. chair nolan: ok, thank you. secretary boomer: we are going back to item 14. >> we're going to recall a
person. you are going to use that mike over there. secretary boomer: you just have to start talking. >> i am with analysis and reporting in the technology division. today, i will be presenting the highlights for the fiscal year 2011 service standards, so we're talking about july through september 2010. and, as always, we begin with on-time performance. on-time performance dropped slightly in the first quarter, to 70%. -- 17%. the five lines with the greatest room for improvement included the 91 owl and some
express. on-time performance increased 72.7%. i just want to put some of these numbers into context. we're talking about some of our busiest corridors, the mission corridor being one of them. this month, we're talking about several in 14. we're talking about a 74.7 on time percentage, and the geary, 71.9% on-time performance. a number of these were sent in september. this is something to keep in mind. -- a number of these were done in september.
the was a significant improvement in real performance. as always, we select a few additional metrics. unscheduled absences dropped from 13.9 to 11.7%. the traffic lane, lines, but swaps maintained improved also because of work on other projects. the number of pipelines -- bike lanes and quarterly coverage and the goal is greater than 12%. last, we continue to make some
improvements in the area of complaint resolution. this was resolved within 14 days. during the current fiscal year we actually increased the goal. that concludes my presentation and i am happy to take questions. >> some members of the board. >> can you highlight a few of the reasons? what are the major factors you can point to. >> we can look at the operational side. >> we get very excited when it goes the other direction. >> before we get into the complicated the wheels of the tear on how this happened, you said when he presented to the slide that when you waited the results for writers as opposed
to lines, the figure is higher, correct? when we waited for writers, my understanding is that as opposed for 72% of the runs being on time, 72.7% of the writers saw of on-time performance. >> this is verses vehicle performance. >> how did that very from the previous quarter? was that down roughly a percentage point or have we seen those numbers split? half be >> i don't know the specific answer. but we can get back to you. >> for me, the second member is most important because of how many of our customers are using service.
i wanted to see if there are any variances. this might not be the case by people waiting. >> john is speaking to what happened overall. there are different characteristics. when you talk about 36, we would expect an operator because of the frequency. this will throw them off schedule. those are some of the nuances that you would see such as that in the cable cars. this is measured exactly the same way that we measure the 38, the 14th, even though it is a different operation in the uniqueness of dealing with taurus and the safety issues. >> i am glad you are keeping the
figures and maybe next time we can see how that is going as well. >> we were at 75%. that is a pretty good drop. what is different between the last quarter and this quarter? >> there are two categories of reasons and that the on-time performance declined. the first category i would describe it as a denigration and some reliability across some of the flics. everything from some of the tracks to does that affect the on-time performance. we are talking about g8 and the condition of our fleet.
if we are going to follow through on the revive -- reliability of our fleet and the measures to reduce the travel time to her on a system that would make a very positive impact. >> i have one question and one the comment. my question, wine and does this rank as one of the poorest on- time performers when it operates with the least amount of traffic is on the streets? i like some follow-up. the of the concern is that this particular quarter with the performance dropped is the first quarter where we suffered a 10% sun service cut. if anything, things should have gotten better, not worse. i hope that this will reverse itself and the next report
although the be added back 60% of the service cut. >> on the service cut issue, we were getting some complaints about overcrowding and that might have created additional 12 times. based on the complaints we were receiving, that might have been on the issues that changed the delay. >> thank you very much. >> if there are no other questions, we will move down. >> item 16, approving the advocacy program. there seems to be no members of the public that wish to address
you. >> are a manager of government affairs is here to give you further information regarding the program which is before you if you have any questions or discussion. >> good afternoon. >> is there any hope that this might happen? >> i think the governor has really thrown the gauntlet given that he has and budget. he has significant sides. there or are on the republican side. you are walking into in permit on proposition 26 and this is
looming over your head. it is critical that he goes back and gets a vote for that swap and this is part of a larger budget negotiation. he would like a vote on the budget itself and was in sacramento last week. we are heartened by the fact that our center is chair of the budget commission and is very supportive of public transportation and transportation needs of the city in general. i would not sit here today and to make a prediction for you. i think from this agency's direct interest in terms of the budget finance.
i think that she hold some faunus and their heart for not just san francisco but the needs of transit in urban areas in general. having said that, she is a tough customer. we will have to wait and see. this is really intended to be a broad framework for how we engage. this allows us to be nimble. i am happy to highlight any of those things and the program.
>> number 6 on the transit only lane enforcement program report and reauthorization, i noted that the program is set to sunset in january. we need to provide -- for the legislatures in march. i'm wondering if we have an idea of what i will look like. >> yes, it is is. >> we have already started working on the report. i have seen a draft on some of the information. , these buses are seen as enforcement vehicles and we have actual video showing how just
the vehicle itself is moving people out of a bus only lanes and out of double parking. citizens are getting citations' if they are in those areas. it is working. >> i would assume the struggle between highway money and the transit money is not going in those directions? >> out of the gate, yes. -- has used dedicated transportation funds to solve the problems in the general fund. until there is a willingness that allow that to be as robust as transportation interests, we will simply see a continuation of the current trend.
mostly what we hear is until after the elections, we will not see anyone who was coming out to say that we need a gas tax. >> thank you very much. >> there is no public -- member of the public would like to speak. >> remove approval. >> at this time for discussion and vote as to whether to conduct a closed session. >> move to close the session.